The Out-Lawyer's Blog

ANOTHER WEEKEND TO PREP HANS, ANOTHER WEEKEND FOR US TO WAIT

DuBois has called Ryan Gill, a former OPD officer now a San Leandro PD patrol officer, who was a “missing persons” investigator at the time. 

DuBois immediately entered the “other suspects” thicket, eliciting from this witness, for example, that Nina’s boyfriend, Anthony Zografos, was ruled out as a suspect because he was elsewhere at the time Nina disappeared.

Dubois’ other purpose is to establish somehow that the mysterious Sean Sturgeon was at one time considered a suspect. 

Gill: There are no suspects in a missing persons’ investigation.

Dubois tried without success to establish the point at which the “missing persons’ inquiry mutated into a homicide investigation.

Gill: It's kind of fluid.

Then Gill seemed to settle on September 13 as a date after which everything was considered a homicide investigation. At that point, according to Gill, police considered Sean sturgeon one possible suspect. Sturgeon – this is based so far only on hearsay – reportedly “dropped off” a large sum of money on August 31.

Then DuBois asked the Gil whether he had heard that young R… described his mother leaving on the day she disappeared. He got the following answer:

Gill: I don't think he said his mother left the house that day.

DuBois: What did he say?

Paraphrasing, Gill recounted that R… saw Mom and Dad ‘in a conversation. It was a loud conversation with 'not nice words,' "

Gill: I think he said a medium-tone conversation with 'not nice words.' I don't recall him saying he saw his mom leave.

Then, finally getting to the intended point of the colloquy –

DuBois: If (R…) had said his mother had left the house, in the CALICO [child abuse agency] interview, it didn’t stop your investigation?

Gill: I’d still be trying to find Nina.

Then DuBois changed tack in an attempt to show that police surveillance of Reiser was designed to detect evasive behavior (and possibly induce it) because it would tend to show guilt.

And that is the point where I must leave this case until Saturday afternoon when I will do some catch-up and further ‘big picture’ analysis.  I must assume at this late stage that the prosecution is examining the hard drives, that Hans is being prepared for his final appearance on Monday or Tuesday, and that – from all appearances – the defense has no more bombs to throw at Hora. 

But the real suspense surrounding this case remains – Will the DA present rebuttal evidence before this case is submitted to the jury?  Will it matter?

I have never given much weight to the defendant’s evasive tactics after the police had obviously zoned in on him as a murder suspect. Much more important is Hans Reiser’s conduct before that.  “Why hide the CRX at all?’ is among the many lingering questions this jury will need to resolve. 

When I acceded to a suggestion that I comment on this trial, my very first observation was that People vs. Hans Reiser would prove to be a closely balanced case, with a tilt towards the prosecution.  My second observation was that this case will probably turn on the jury’s assessment of the accused: What kind of a guy is Han Reiser, really?  Would this killing be plausible if he is the killer? 

It is amazing to me that, after weeks and weeks, so little has changed.  This is one of those rare examples of criminal litigation that could still go either way or hang up, much like a baseball game that goes into an extra inning.